STUDY: Loners More Likely To Embrace Conspiracy Theories
A recent Princeton University study has found that a correlation exists between social exclusion and the acceptance of conspiratorial beliefs.
The study, which involved over 119 participants, is set to be published in the Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology.
The participants were expected to self-report on a personal past social interaction and report on the degree of exclusion they have experienced. They also self-reported to which degree they embraced a number of different conspiracies. Researchers concluded that for the folks who had experienced a greater degree of social exclusion, that those people were much more likely to support conspiratorial beliefs.
The researchers also suggest that perhaps for those who experience a level of social solitude, that the conspiracy theories provide them with a way to make sense of their lives and feel that they have a place in society.
What Is A Conspiracy?
A conspiracy theorist is a heavily overused term today and it's an easy label for someone to toss out when they want to try and dismiss you. Quite often, the term conspiracy theorist is just a derogatory label that is often used to try and discourage any divergent thinking.
A conspiracy is simply an agreement between two or more people, to commit an offense that is prohibited by law, or at least that is how it can be defined in criminal terms. And many "conspiracy theories" have been proven true.
There have been many times when the public was directly lied to and deceived by many individuals in positions of authority, and their deceit lead to tremendous conflicts like the Iraq War, Vietnam War, and much more.
Government's like secrecy and despise transparency and so in a way they invite conspiracies because people wonder what they are up to, and about their involvement in different activities, and about what plans they might have for the future that will impact millions of people.
Perhaps those who spend more time alone socially, are more likely to explore controversial topics because they aren't afraid of how friends/others around them might perceive them. When you're focused on being popular and making lots of friends, talking to everyone about controversial historical and political topics quite often isn't going to help you do that.
There is a certain stigma with conspiracies and many people don't want to be caught listening to or talking about them because they don't want their friends or family to think that they are "weird."
The term "conspiracy theory" today quite often refers to any alternative explanation to the government's or media's official narrative. And considering how many times that the officials have been caught telling lies, it's really no surprise that there are a growing number of people out there who are questioning what they are being told; open to embracing alternative theories and explanations.
If the true account of things is too uncomfortable for the state to divulge, then the truth will be re-branded as conspiracy theory and anyone who entertains such theories will be laughed at and demonized for daring to think outside the pack; thinking for yourself rather than allowing the collective to do your thinking for you.
Throughout history, it has been the people who haven't been afraid to be different and to question the majority consensus or official narrative, who have allowed us to discover what's really going on and to know the truth. There is no need to bully someone just because they think differently than you do.
Those who are willing to question what they are told, are prompting much needed discovery and discussion, are doing so for the good of the people.
Pics:
Pixabay
Flickr
Global Research
izquotes
Source:
http://wws.princeton.edu/news-and-events/news/item/social-exclusion-leads-conspiratorial-thinking-study-finds
https://www.dansanchez.me/feed/another-conspiracy-theory-becomes-fact-the-feds-stealth-bailout-of-foreign-banks-goes-mainstream-zero-hedge
https://mises.org/library/understanding-federal-reserve%E2%80%99s-shell-game
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-conspiracy-to-kill-martin-luther-king-not-a-theory-but-a-fact/5329816
http://www.globalresearch.ca/a-conspiracy-theory-that-became-a-conspiracy-fact-the-cia-afghanistans-poppy-fields-and-americas-growing-heroin-epidemic/5533673
http://www.globalresearch.ca/jfk-and-911-the-tide-is-turning-the-official-story-is-now-the-conspiracy-theory/5544558
This post really drew out the loners.
I predict that in less than a decade those who believe mainstream media are gonna be the weirdos.
I would like to agree with this, but I cannot. The majority will always be less than intellectually capable of handling reality than those on the right-hand side of the bell curve. Half the Earth's population has an IQ of less than 88, this is not improving.
https://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/IQ/1950-2050/
Let's work to make it so, but to do that we need better technologies and institutions built. Cooperative Agorism is the way forward. Alex Jones style "journalism" is a weight holding us all back.
(My comment here is assuming a solid state of what we define as "mainstream" media, which is ofc not how the term should normally be used because what is "mainstream" changes with time)
I agree, Alex Jones: where are your sources!
If that's the case then what ever the masses support then (the non weirdos) will be the mainstream media of that time. Popular support is the definition of mainstream.
@justtryme didn't understand what he said, clearly.
"I predict that in less than a decade those who believe mainstream media are gonna be the weirdos."
He didn't say that the mainstream would change, he didn't imply it either, he simply said that those who believe mainstream will be the weirdos in a decade.
Why I pointed this out:
It is just a simple fail at reading comprehension and leaps of logic, concluded by telling us what mainstream is defined as, implying that @someonewhoisme was mistaken when they said something about mainstream support, which was not the case, but it must be pointed that it's an explanation from someone that believes that antigenically indistinguishable is a concept that they have any understanding of, showing that this person, @justtryme90 has very limited literacy and regardless of what they engage in, it is a fair warning to anyone out there, especially since they claim the name @justtryme90, implying that they have an attitude of engagement for discussion and this is the 2nd case in less than a week where I ran by them and their disregard for discussion. The important part is that this person purports themselves as biochemistry researcher, I have to pull back and contain myself because it is obviously incredible how uneducated/uninformed they are!
No no no, you are not interpreting correctly. The reason why conspiracy theorists are regarded as "weirdos" is because their thinking is not in line with the majority (as "weird" is something outside of the normal as defined by the majority). Were OP's situation to take place it would indicate that the views of the majority shifted such that the current majorities views are considered weird. Thus the mainstream would have changed and the current "mainstream media" would no longer be the mainstream.
That's not very nice.
No, it doesn't imply that, you are just inferring it. In reality, it's just a handle that I came up with when I was 12 years old ... decades ago. I use it only because I always have not because it has any actual relevance.
What you are trying to say is that I am an idiot, not uneducated. Educated really only applies to factual knowledge, you are saying that I lack mental functioning abilities.
Cheers.
This is of course true. I chose to interpret someonewhoismes comment favorably to having a conversation about how to reach the scenario I thought he was actually imagining, as opposed to what the words used would have suggested by themselves if I didn't have this specific larger context to go by.
Okay, cheers.
guilty!
OR maybe Loners are more likely to do studies about conspiracy theories.
woah.
I think it's both. Introverts are more likely to become academic in one way or the other. Loners are more likely to adopt extreme (not necessarily faulty) points of view and not be talked out of it by their peers, if they have any.
that is also a true possibility.
These were the conclusions of the study that reported this.
First it's clear that it is not the same as the studies conclusion as @the-ego-is-you's remark.. Next, there were two different studies that mirrored each other, not one study.
@the-ego-is-you didn't conclude that at all,and it must be pointed that he even gave the benefit of doubt as opposed to the conclusions of the study by mentioning "not necessarily faulty" when he talked about "their points of view" as opposed to the clearly different meaning that the Assistant professor chose to use..
Too bad "loners" don't follow the PACK MENTALITY... we could get rid of all the conspiracies and just stick to FAKE NEWS like everyone else...
much more appealing! lol
MUCH LESS INTIMIDATING THAN THIS...
Oh yes we can't allow guns... just take a look at Sweden. We banned guns and now we only have a bunch of stabbings, homemade bombs and grenades being thrown instead. Much calmer. The weapons are cheaper in the black market too.
That sounds about right.
I once heard that blaming guns for killing people was like blaming spoons for Rosie O'Donnell being fat.
meanwhile in the UK.....
that is WAY too much freedom! lol
Yeah, I guess rather than being free to hunt my own wild game it would be safer for everyone if I just bought "mechanically separated chicken" that never saw the light of day and died of natural causes, like antibiotic overdoses, instead.
mmmmm!! lol
Thanks for the post. I decided long ago that I'd rather be weird and have few friends than be stupid and have many stupid friends. Being weird smells better and the view isn't so brown.
honjii.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/republican-cri.png?w=550
.
I'd think this is basically what's going on.
I know media would probably 'blame it on the socially awkward', being weirdos and such. Luckily, many of us know these loners are mostly the more interesting people :-)
That's pretty much what I was going to say!
:D
Loners are also more intelligent than average- so maybe the 'non-loners' would be wise to listen to what they have to say...... https://www.sott.net/article/315056-Surprising-find-Smart-people-tend-to-be-loners